Open 177 (Monks and Masons) - Game Over.

[ElectricBadger]

The I've eaten too much pie Vote Count

Maemuki (4): Zazie, Maemuki, YamiJoey, ElectricBadger
Hewitt (2): Scien, Yankcrane151
Wulfy(1): ODDin
Scien(1): Farside22

Not Voting: Nikanor, hewitt, Wulfy, Fuzzyman

With 12 alive it takes 7 to lynch. Deadline is 3 weeks from now. Tuesday 17th November, 9pm English time

Lots of Love,
Hayl xxx

Well, your assurance is good enough for me.

Unvote Maemuki, Vote Nikanor

for not posting yet.

*Devours the cookie in a distinctly non-lycanthropic, non-mafioso sort of fashion* Move along. Nothing to see here, just a badger with a cookie.

[Wulfy]

*barks*
Submited:

Votes ugly bird Maemuki

[Maemuki]

Why am I ugly? :<

@ farside, *gives pillow*

We don't want you to get a headache so you can't scumhunt, right?

@ Electric, so you're most definitely not a villain, right? xP

[YamiJoey]

Unvote; Vote: Wulfy

I think that's too close to a wagon for a joke now. I also forgot to make my "I hate this game for having no backstory" post at the beginning. =(

YJ

[Scien]

Good legitimate conversation already.

The only time I see people touch on a possible scummy thing and back off our typically scum.

I don't see how it is possibly scummy. I think it is odd that he hasn't confirmed yet and no one mentioned it, especially for people random voting, but its just a poof of WIFOM really, and there is no real reason to try and push it as a real case.

That's why I chose the word 'odd' and not scummy. There is no way to derive meaning from this... so I can't attribute scum points for it.

For you to be legitimately concerned about my play, you must think something about the late confirm or random vote was acutally scummy and not just a curiosity, and are wondering why I didn't think so as well.

Just for record are you claiming that the late confirm is scummy? Or the fact that the random voter didn't mention the late confirm? (Yes, this is in addition to you claiming that me not pushing it is scummy too, I understand that.)

[farside22]

Good legitimate conversation already.

The only time I see people touch on a possible scummy thing and back off our typically scum.

I don't see how it is possibly scummy. I think it is odd that he hasn't confirmed yet and no one mentioned it, especially for people random voting, but its just a poof of WIFOM really, and there is no real reason to try and push it as a real case.

That's why I chose the word 'odd' and not scummy. There is no way to derive meaning from this... so I can't attribute scum points for it.

For you to be legitimately concerned about my play, you must think something about the late confirm or random vote was acutally scummy and not just a curiosity, and are wondering why I didn't think so as well.

Just for record are you claiming that the late confirm is scummy? Or the fact that the random voter didn't mention the late confirm? (Yes, this is in addition to you claiming that me not pushing it is scummy too, I understand that.)

A late confirmation is null tell. I know people have lives outside in the RL. If someone confirmed late it's for any reason and all reasons.
I'm wondering why you would point something out. Flirt around the idea of it but not push the issue at all.
Like hey I noticed this but don't feel like persuing it so don't mind me as I now vote for someone else completely.
It's very irksome and is a sign I see that scums do in many a game.
There's other tells I look for but I'm not discussing as I like to see people slip up and catch scum on those slip ups.

[Scien]

Seriously you have a

good thought

and you feel like random voting?!!! [...] Your not being aggressive on this, your sitting back and just bringing it up but you don't want to press on it. [...] A late confirmation is null tell. [...] If someone confirmed late it's for any reason and all reasons.

I have a good thought? One that you simultaneously say is also a null tell? But you are criticizing me for not being aggressive over it?

Your views are all over the place if I am reading this right. What was a good thought? How was it a good thought? If its a null tell, why do you want me to aggressively pursue it?

You are not making sense lady.

---

Here let me try and ask this question again since you missed it the first time:
Your previous posts made it sound like me mentioning it was a good thought that I should have pursued. Which thought? The thought about the late confirm? Or the thought about the random vote on a non-confirmed and not mentioning it? Please clarify what you are talking about so we know what to talk about.

[Nikanor]

Gah! You started the conversation without me? I guess this is what I get for sleeping in...
I'm getting some good vibes from both Scien and farside here, so I won't vote either of them. Instead, I'll...

Vote: YamiJoey

for his double standards regarding EB and Wulfy. Wulfy gets a vote for hopping on the Maemuki wagon to put her at L-3, but YJ does not mention EB's L-3 vote on Maemuki just a few posts prior.

@farside: I'm glad to see you didn't play that newbcard you decided to give yourself. You would be my vote right now were it not for your attacks on Scien.

[farside22]

Seriously you have a

good thought

and you feel like random voting?!!! [...] Your not being aggressive on this, your sitting back and just bringing it up but you don't want to press on it. [...] A late confirmation is null tell. [...] If someone confirmed late it's for any reason and all reasons.

I have a good thought? One that you simultaneously say is also a null tell? But you are criticizing me for not being aggressive over it?

Your views are all over the place if I am reading this right. What was a good thought? How was it a good thought? If its a null tell, why do you want me to aggressively pursue it?

You are not making sense lady.

---

Here let me try and ask this question again since you missed it the first time:
Your previous posts made it sound like me mentioning it was a good thought that I should have pursued. Which thought? The thought about the late confirm? Or the thought about the random vote on a non-confirmed and not mentioning it? Please clarify what you are talking about so we know what to talk about.

Don't play mind games or twist my words sir. I don't not appriecate it.
Your the one who brought up the fact wolfy had not confirmed. You found it yourself to be odd but did not pounce on it as anything more then a eh comment with a random vote.
If you did not find it so worthwhile then why mention it in the first place?
It was the whole comment I found very peculiar. Why waste a random vote on something you found whether small or not on a vote? Why random vote at that point if you found it odd and not persue it further?

[farside22]

@farside: I'm glad to see you didn't play that newbcard you decided to give yourself. You would be my vote right now were it not for your attacks on Scien.

I should have known better but it feels weird going back into mafia after being gone so long I feel green behind the ears and giggly like a school kid with my first kiss.
I know bad metaphor but it's more like a long forgetton friend that you try to feel out everything you had before.

[Maemuki]

You would be my vote right now were it not for your attacks on Scien.

Explain, please. It makes me think that you suspect Scien now, yet you're voting YJ. Which one is scummier? Why?

[ElectricBadger]

@ Electric, so you're most definitely not a villain, right? xP

Oh hecks no, I Just Say No to scumminess. Townie 4 Life and all that.

@farside: I'm glad to see you didn't play that newbcard you decided to give yourself. You would be my vote right now were it not for your attacks on Scien.

Erm...you're calling him out for not doing something you'd find scummy? This is even worse than Scien's vague suspicion thing.

[Scien]

Don't play mind games or twist my words sir. I don't not appriecate it.

I am directly quoting you and not twisting anything. I don't see the mind games. Nice try on both counts though.

Your the one who brought up the fact wolfy had not confirmed. You found it yourself to be odd but did not pounce on it as anything more then a eh comment with a random vote.

Because I agree it was weak. That is why I said it didn't mean anything to me yet. Weak points do not a case make.

If you did not find it so worthwhile then why mention it in the first place?

I thought it was worth mentioning that we had a 'random' vote on what was a person who had not checked in the game yet. It's WIFOM to have suggested anything else about it, and it wouldn't have helped town. However it is something worth noting. Combined with future actions, it may give sight to motives involved.

It was the whole comment I found very peculiar. Why waste a random vote on something you found whether small or not on a vote? Why random vote at that point if you found it odd and not persue it further?

Okay, so both phrases I mentioned in the post that you are complaining about you think are weak? Thanks, that helps a bit. Why not pursue something that is small? Can that small thing be scummy? I'm not so sure it is. I am looking for scum... I am not looking for small things that can excuse my vote.

---

Serious questions:
If my two phrases were weak, why do you suggest an aggressive case? What is the townie benefit of aggressively pushing a weak case?

---

Trying to claim that I am playing mind games here is laughable. You are simultaneously telling me that my points suck, and that I should have been more aggressive in pushing them. That is a contradiction, and it doesn't even involve any analysis to see that. It is directly observable from raw quotes.

[farside22]

Where do you see the word weak here?

Vote: Hewitt

Why hello there.

Although I don't know what to think about the Wulfy not confirming thing, or the person going after him without mentioning this. No really, its a curiosity, and I haven't made up my mind if it actually means anything >.<

Now your saying it's weak after I said it was a null tell but seeing the first post it looks frankly like your trying to bring something to a random vote but flutter off into nothing for no reason. No where do you say it's weak.
Is this a note for yourself? Is this a weak attempt at finding something? Was this attempt at anything and why did you wait till I said it was a null tell and weak to say it was weak yourself?

[farside22]

If my two phrases were weak, why do you suggest an aggressive case? What is the townie benefit of aggressively pushing a weak case?

I see weak case and I'm going to question your motive. I see an attempt at a weak comment with a random vote and pounce on it wondering if your vagueness is a slight buss, or if it means more.

[Scien]

Now your saying it's weak after I said it was a null tell but seeing the first post it looks frankly like your trying to bring something to a random vote but flutter off into nothing for no reason. No where do you say it's weak.

I will answer this by quote:

I don't see how it is possibly scummy. I think it is odd that he hasn't confirmed yet and no one mentioned it, especially for people random voting, but its just a poof of WIFOM really, and there is no real reason to try and push it as a real case.

That BTW was my second post.

[1]Is this a weak attempt at finding something? [2] Was this attempt at anything and why did you wait till I said it was a null tell and weak to say it was weak yourself?

[1] No. It was an observation.
[2] No, it wasn't an attempt of anything but an observation. Why did I wait? I didn't, I believe part of the post that you are complaining about said: "No really, its a curiosity, and I haven't made up my mind if it actually means anything." Did I say it was scummy? No I said it was a curiosity.

I see weak case and I'm going to question your motive. I see an attempt at a weak comment with a random vote and pounce on it wondering if your vagueness is a slight buss, or if it means more.

Oh? So I was making a case now? That's news to me.

You didn't answer my questions... again. I know you are trying to keep the pressure up on me, but please do try and address my counter concerns if you truly are pro-town:
If my two phrases were weak, why do you suggest an aggressive case? What is the townie benefit of aggressively pushing a weak case?

[farside22]

You didn't answer my questions... again. I know you are trying to keep the pressure up on me, but please do try and address my counter concerns if you truly are pro-town:
If my two phrases were weak, why do you suggest an aggressive case? What is the townie benefit of aggressively pushing a weak case?

Please don't condescend me. I can do it too but I"m much more mean about it.
I have repeated why it bothers me.
1) you didn't see it as a weak case first post. Looking just at the first post.
2) you seemed to meantion in a second time as a muse then blow if off as nothing. I sense you trying to see if you were going to get a bite off of such a comment which it didn't then tried to fish some more to see if anyone else would bite.
Either (a) this is a trap or (b) a scum trying to build a weak case off crap and hoping others will fallow and screw up.
I'm trying to see which category you are in. Since you seem to be aggrevisely harping on me for finding your analysis irksome and weak I go with (b) as a townie looking to trap someone would have not backtracked and found my inquiry on your weak comment something to make catty comments about or twist into something not there.
Since you want to look at comments and can't seem to really put together everything I said without spinning it I like my vote where it stand.

[farside22]

Since I"m royally pissed off at this back and forth lets start from the beginning.

The only time I see people touch on a possible scummy thing and back off our typically scum. Your non aggression seems like something I see when people (scum) want to make a weak case but don't want to be agressive in it as it might look weak when it is.

This was said after your first comments.
You didn't say anything about it as weak till I did here:

I don't see how it is possibly scummy. I think it is odd that he hasn't confirmed yet and no one mentioned it, especially for people random voting, but its just a poof of WIFOM really, and there is no real reason to try and push it as a real case.

Then you try the old Lets put words in someone's mouth trick:

Just for record are you claiming that the late confirm is scummy? Or the fact that the random voter didn't mention the late confirm? (Yes, this is in addition to you claiming that me not pushing it is scummy too, I understand that.)

Then you avoid comments I noticed. This all in the first 2 pages folks. Just in case you thought you had a lot to read.

[ElectricBadger]

My read is that Scien's first post indicates he understood the case was weak/vague/what-have-you, which is why he didn't pursue it. Farside, other than not specifically stating it was weak what did he say that indicated to you he believed it was a strong case?

However, I do agree that his choice of a random vote rather than pursuing a weak case is questionable and anti-town. Scien comes across as deliberately obtuse in avoiding addressing that issue:

What is the townie benefit of aggressively pushing a weak case?

...rather than RVS? I think it's obvious. So why did you choose as you did, Scien?

[Scien]

Please don't condescend me. I can do it too but I"m much more mean about it.

You aren't doing it? I've definitely been getting that vibe. I can assure you on my end, that it is unintentional. I just want my questions answered as well. You can beat up on me all you want, but I'm not going to stop looking around because of it.

1) you didn't see it as a weak case first post. Looking just at the first post.

I disagree. The reason I didn't draw conclusions is because it was a weak observation. Something my second post suggests.

[1] you seemed to meantion in a second time as a muse then blow if off as nothing. [2] I sense you trying to see if you were going to get a bite off of such a comment which it didn't then tried to fish some more to see if anyone else would bite.
[3] Either (a) this is a trap or (b) a scum trying to build a weak case off crap and hoping others will fallow and screw up.
I'm trying to see which category you are in. [4] Since you seem to be aggrevisely harping on me for finding your analysis irksome and weak I go with (b) as a townie looking to trap someone would have not backtracked and found my inquiry on your weak comment something to make catty comments about or twist into something not there.
[5] Since you want to look at comments and can't seem to really put together everything I said without spinning it I like my vote where it stand.

[1] I'm not sure I fully understand. Are you saying that I tried pushing that WIFOM twice? Where did I do anything other than mention it and get jumped right away? I honestly don't think I tried to 'push' anything even once. I know that is the cause for some of this grief, but I am not going to push an observation that if regarded as scummy was weak at best. It would not have helped town, and would have hurt me no matter what alignment I am. I don't understand how you are saying that if I pushed it I would not be attacked for pushing a weak case.

[2] The 'looking for bites' comment makes sense, and I know that is part of the reason why I am being looked at. I can't prove I wasn't polling like you suggest. No one could, its not merely a personal fault.

[3] Or merely an observation. It's not an either/or. Also suggesting that it is a either or with two negatives sounds manipulative to me. I'm not intentionally trying to piss you off, and I am sorry if I am doing so, but are you sure that that's not emotions leading your views. I assure you there is a way to be in this mess and still have a protown alignment.

[4] I am aggressively defending myself. That's scummy now? I don't think the fact that you think the initial comment was weak is irksome. Its natural, and I feel the same way. One of the reasons I didn't push a case over it. You are putting words in MY mouth, aren't you accusing me of the same?

[5] Um?

---

You didn't say anything about it as weak till I did here

However I did say in the original comment that I hadn't decided if it meant anything. If it wasn't weak, it would have been an easy decision to make. Instead I just throw it out and don't attack anyone over it. Yes, you claim that is scummy, but it also suggests that that observation was not strong enough for me to get a good read off of it.

You didn't say anything about it as weak till I did here

You then quote my SECOND post in the game. This discussion has been going on for a long while now, and you seem to be suggesting that I was holding that my observation was not weak all along. I am trying to tell you this is not the case, and even when I posted it I thought it was weak. Yes, I didn't explicitly say it was weak, but my actions, and second post suggest that I was treating it with the weakness it deserved.

Then you try the old Lets put words in someone's mouth trick:

No, I'll fall for your trap. I didn't put words in your mouth there. Here let me grab the quotes for you:
I say this to start this mess:

Although I don't know what to think about the Wulfy not confirming thing, or the person going after him without mentioning this. No really, its a curiosity, and I haven't made up my mind if it actually means anything >.<

You say this in response:

Wow this is so weak. I mean really?

Seriously you have a good thought and you feel like random voting?!!!

[...]

I assume that by "good thought" you mean there was something in what I said that was strong enough to pressure over, meaning that you thought something in there was not weak (which surprised me, because I didn't think there was anything in there strong). So I respond with a question to determine which of the things you thought was strong enough to push a case on:

For you to be legitimately concerned about my play, you must think something about the late confirm or random vote was acutally scummy and not just a curiosity, and are wondering why I didn't think so as well.

My thought there was mainly, "Hey, you are complaining because I didn't push my observation hard enough, how could I when it would have been immediately criticized as a null tell at best."
Slowly over the next few posts you let me know that both of them are weak in your eyes.

Long story short there is NO manipulation here, I am not trying to fool anyone. Your initial complains were worded as to criticize me for not pushing 'a good idea'. A 'good idea' that you call a null tell and criticize me later for even bringing up in the first point. I saw this as an inconsistency and tried to question over it, but apparently pissed you off in doing so.

Then you avoid comments I noticed.

I did?

[Scien]

I think it's obvious. So why did you choose as you did, Scien?

It has been suggested that I should have tried to push that observation as a case. Let's just take a second to see what would have happened.

I post a comment about the situation, which utilizes WIFOM and is fairly weak without anything to support it. Since this is early game there is nothing to support it yet.

So in this "choose your own adventure", I immediately attack ODDin on the grounds that he is 'random' voting for an inactive, someone who wouldn't have defended themselves. (Or I guess Wulf on the grounds of the late confirm. Depending on which I wanted to pressure more). I would have to overextend a lot here, because it IS early game and there's nothing to back me up.

Town/scum catch this, and depending on their alignment will manipulate it, or be critical of it. I will get accused for pushing a weak case, and fabricating suspicion. Mainly pretty anti-town stuff. Pressure is immediately taken off ODDin in favor of me, and we are in the same mess as we are now for different reasons.

It doesn't matter what alignment I had at that time. It was a bad idea to use a weak observations in ANY case. I am now caught in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.

"Why were you pushing a weak case on someone when you didn't have much to go on. You are manipulating the situation scum."

Or.

"Why did you not use your observation in an attack on ODDin or Wulf. You are manipulating the situation by pushing cases that you don't want to be involved in. Scum."

Of course I didn't foresee how much trouble I would get into for not pushing a weak case. Wow, that last sentence is not something I ever expected to have to say.

[Scien]

Of course my question

still

stands to Farside. She suggested that I should have pushed a weak case as opposed to letting the observation rest. I want to know why that makes sense to her.

[farside22]

Starting from the beginning again.

Vote: Hewitt

Why hello there.

Although I don't know what to think about the Wulfy not confirming thing, or the person going after him without mentioning this. No really, its a curiosity, and I haven't made up my mind if it actually means anything >.<

This sounded to me like hmmm why would someone vote random for someone who is not confirmed.
I did say it was a good idea and that was a poor choice of words but it seemed like to me you had a thought and decided to toss it away and random vote instead which is odd.

I don't see how it is possibly scummy. I think it is odd that he hasn't confirmed yet and no one mentioned it, especially for people random voting, but its just a poof of WIFOM really, and there is no real reason to try and push it as a real case.

Again you don't call it weak here. You call it WIFOM but you go and say that it's really WIFOM. Why would you bring up something you felt was WIFOM in the first place? Why would you casually throw it out their but then just again back off on it like it was nothing?

Please don't condescend me. I can do it too but I"m much more mean about it.

You aren't doing it? I've definitely been getting that vibe. I can assure you on my end, that it is unintentional. I just want my questions answered as well. You can beat up on me all you want, but I'm not going to stop looking around because of it.

This made me LOL. If I have been condescending I appologize. I'm just finding things you say a bit flippant. As well as the fact you focas on one comment but you note I keep saying weak. You want to twist this like I was the one capatizling on a weak statement, which I did not. I asked why you were not aggressive on it.
I find instead of wanting to answer some of my questions you flipped this around on me for question you on it.

Why is it anti-town in my eyes for someone not to be agressive:

See what I see is that people don't hesitate on something they find whether odd or WIFOM in random stage. Some people use it for traps. Some use it for talk.
But to see someone hesitate as you did in the beggining dancing around the subject felt like someone trying to come up with fluff and see who agrees with it.
You have been around long enough I see to know that someone who doesn't confirm right away is a null tell.
Your first too comments then your questioning of me with your I don't know how I should react and why is this scummy really just ring insincere in my ear.

[ElectricBadger]

Hmm.

Later in the game, yes, pushing hard on weak evidence is a scum tell. As a first post, having ANY evidence is great - the goal is to get out of RVS as soon as possible. Refusing to put pressure on other players out of fear of being attacked comes across as very anti-town: it reflects the scum motive of being more concerned about staying alive than finding villains.

I'll have to ponder this. Either a bad play as over-conservative town or a tipped hand as a villain. For the moment I like my vote as it is until I hear an explanation from Nik.

[Scien]

I would have been attacked for using a weak observation on someone, if that observation is all I had, and I needed to stretch for the rest. This would not have been good for the town. I can weather a bit of scrutiny, but getting the town to focus on me is wasting time trying to find scum. It would not have made sense for me to walk down a path where the town would immediately make me the main suspicion.

I don't think using the weak attack would have been the right move there. There are several telling me that I am wrong, but I just don't see how.

WIFOM is weak alone. It can be backed up with evidence down the road. WIFOM is not totally useless, but it is useless in a vacuum. Early game is kind of a vacuum.

Yes, someone confirming late is a null tell. It was merely an observation. You still think that I should have taken that null tell and pushed a case against ODDin or Wulf over it? I still think this sounds like you are arguing both sides. Pushing that case would have been scummy, just like not pushing it is apparently scummy (I don't understand why the latter is the case though).

I couldn't be MORE sincere at this point.

I have been trying to explain my actions to the best of my ability. I have tried to hit any question you had. I am not hiding. You mentioned that I deliberately missed something earlier I believe. Can you quote it? I don't mind answering anything.

---

As a first post, having ANY evidence is great - the goal is to get out of RVS as soon as possible.

I don't think that observation was strong enough to be considered evidence. We are certainly out now, heh, although that was not the plan with that statement.

Refusing to put pressure on other players out of fear of being attacked comes across as very anti-town: it reflects the scum motive of being more concerned about staying alive than finding villains.

I knew it would be spun that way, but it is also the in the interest of town to avoid suspicion. Avoiding suspicion is a null tell, both alignments want to do it.

Either a bad play as over-conservative town

Ouch. I assure you it could have been a whole lot worse. I was starting to get mad there for a bit.

As I have said before, I don't fear talking, and am not hiding. If you want me to comment on my play just ask. Plugging in small attacks like that doesn't really help, and does nothing to promote me providing evidence to change your mind.